Addressing an Overlooked Science Outreach Audience: Development

Aug 11, 2017 - To address this omission, we developed a science outreach program called SciMentors that provides experiment-based lessons to existing ...
2 downloads 14 Views 2MB Size
Download PDF
Article pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc

Addressing an Overlooked Science Outreach Audience: Development of a Science Mentorship Program Focusing on Critical Thinking Skills for Adults Working toward a High School Equivalency Degree Nicole L. Gagnon*,† and Anna J. Komor*,†,‡ Department of Chemistry, University of Minnesota, 207 Pleasant St SE, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455, United States S Supporting Information *

ABSTRACT: Adult learners seeking a high school equivalency degree are a highly motivated group of students that almost universally meet outreach audience goals of serving minority, low-income, and other disadvantaged populations. Despite the demonstrated need of this population, these students are not commonly served by university-sponsored science outreach programs. To address this omission, we developed a science outreach program called SciMentors that provides experimentbased lessons to existing science classes at adult learning centers, focusing equally on scientific concepts and critical thinking skills. SciMentors provides an opportunity for handson learning that would otherwise not be available to this population of students. The program is run by graduate students and postdoctoral associates in the Department of Chemistry at the University of Minnesota. Evaluation of the impact of the program on both the students and the volunteer teachers was performed by surveying participants. Via the surveys, students reported an increase in knowledge of and interest in science as a result of the program, and learning center staff reported an increased attendance on science experiment days. Volunteers reported increased mastery in a wide range of skills including science communication, leadership, confidence, and cultural awareness. Now entering its fourth year, SciMentors has served over 60 adult learners, provided over 270 volunteer hours to the community, and received positive feedback from all involved. KEYWORDS: Communication/Writing, Continuing Education, Curriculum, Hands-On Learning/Manipulatives, Inquiry-Based/Discovery Learning, Minorities in Chemistry, Interdisciplinary/Multidisciplinary, Public Understanding/Outreach, Women in Chemistry

■

INTRODUCTION An estimated 18 million American citizens between the ages of 25 and 65, or about 10% of the total United States population, lack a high school diploma.1 This statistic does not include recent immigrants or refugees on the pathway to citizenship, making the 10% estimate a conservative one. Without a high school diploma, a person is at a great disadvantage when applying for jobs and enrolling in vocational programs. Adults who are no longer eligible to attend high school may take a series of tests to receive a high school equivalency certificate. The most common of these tests is the General Education Development (GED), which is composed of four sections: Reasoning through Language Arts, Mathematical Reasoning, Social Studies, and Science. In 2013, approximately 743,000 adults attempted the GED, demonstrating a strong interest in returning to education and in pursuing new opportunities later in life.2 The Minnesota Literacy Council (MLC) runs adult literacy schools that provide classes in English, computer skills, job preparation, and GED preparation.3 The goal of the GED © XXXX American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.

preparation classes is to help students with the arduous task of fitting four or more years of full-time classroom learning into the scant hours between jobs and parenting responsibilities. These literacy schools, called Open Door Learning Centers, have a small professional staff and rely heavily on volunteer teachers and tutors. Science classes may be taught by a volunteer with little science background, and are mostly paperbased due to limited resources for the development of experiment-based lessons. While paper-based lessons are a sufficient start to teaching scientific concepts, the addition of experiment-based lessons greatly enhances the development of critical thinking skills and helps students retain and integrate information into their daily lives.4,5 Considering the limited focus on experiential learning in the adult literacy community due to resource barriers, we formed a partnership between the MLC Open Door Learning Centers Received: December 21, 2016 Revised: June 26, 2017

A

DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b01002 J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX

Journal of Chemical Education

Article

leadership, and cultural awareness. Presented below are the goals, design, and outcomes of the SciMentors program for adult science literacy, which is now entering its fourth year. We hope to emphasize the importance of this under-addressed educational need and provide a roadmap for successful implementation of similar programs by other chemistry communities.

and the University of Minnesota Chemistry community. The overarching goal of the partnership is to increase the scientific literacy, which includes both scientific concepts and critical thinking skills, of the adult students. The resulting program, SciMentors, designs and runs bimonthly experiment-based lessons to supplement the Open Door GED science curriculum. SciMentors is run by volunteer graduate students and postdoctoral associates from the University of Minnesota Department of Chemistry (CHEM). The program was initially supported by grants from the Office of Equity and Diversity Women’s Center and the University of Minnesota (U of MN) chemistry chapter of Women in Science and Engineering (WISE). Current funding and logistical support is provided by CHEM. A search of the science outreach literature indicates that SciMentors is unique in that it serves adult learners through a long-term mentorship program. Existing science outreach efforts focused on adults are primarily administered via nonclassroom settings, such as science centers, aquariums, zoos, and print and broadcast media.6,7 Structured science outreach programs are traditionally directed toward youth audiences with the idea that we must “catch them while they are young”; i.e., science outreach is a recruitment tactic best used to encourage young people to pursue science and engineering careers.8 However, it is not just the young who pursue new careers. Adults with a newly earned high school equivalency certificate will be highly motivated to seek a new occupation that uses their newly obtained degree. Furthermore, in addition to potential financial and job satisfaction benefits,9 the sense of accomplishment that comes from completing a task such as earning a GED can encourage other family members to set and make educational goals. Assisting in the education of an adult learner who is also a parent can have positive effects on an entire family.10−13 More important than recruitment into science careers is the development of a critically thinking and responsible citizenry. The scientific method is perhaps the simplest and clearest method for making informed, evidence-based decisions, and this method and the skills within (framing questions and problems, analyzing data, summarizing information) can be used outside of the science classroom in a multitude of careers.14,15 The SciMentors program also provides the unique opportunity to teach science and scientific thought to people at an age where many have written off a scientific understanding of the world as confusing, boring, or, most tragically, unattainable. Students may, and do, ask a wide variety of questions that have allowed us to clear up common misconceptions that directly and indirectly impact the health of the participants, such as “all bacteria are bad” and “the flu can be treated with an antibiotic”. SciMentors is an ongoing program that fosters increasing partnership between the U of MN and community organizations. From a teaching perspective, the sustained mentorship nature of the program allows the students to gain a broad and interconnected view of science, and honors the idea that learning is a lifelong commitment. From a community partnership perspective, the program allows CHEM volunteers to build relationships with students and with the staff at Open Door schools. To assess the impact of the program, surveys were administered to the program students and volunteer teachers. Responses were overall positive, with students reporting increased knowledge of and interest in science, and volunteers reporting growth in skills including communication,

■

PROGRAM STRUCTURE

Objectives

Our initial goals in designing the SciMentors program were to assist an underserved population in our community; create a sustainable, long-term mentorship program; and educate the public about science. We also sought to provide a new outreach opportunity in which volunteers from CHEM would practice communicating science with a diverse demographic as well as learn how to design curricula. While we chose to work with adult education schools, many aspects of this program could easily be applied to K−12 schools or after school programs. Community Partnerships

We initially partnered with the MLC Open Door Learning Center in North Minneapolis (site A), historically the most impoverished and disenfranchised section of the city, and have since expanded to an additional Open Door location in the Twin Cities (site B). The student body at the locations SciMentors serves is very diverse; 50−70% of the student body that SciMentors serves are recent immigrants, and greater than half call English a second, third, or even fourth language. Students range in age from late teens to mid-70s, with the bulk of student in the 20−50 age range. Genders are equally represented.16 Almost all GED seekers are minority and/or low-income students, both of which are top priority targets for outreach efforts.17 While some students attend the classes with the specific goal of obtaining a GED, others are seeking an increased mastery of the English language, mathematics, or American culture (Table S2). Partnering with a community organization has many benefits that would not be available to a standalone program. Open Door provides an existing class structure and established relationships with students, as well as ongoing conversation between the staff at Open Door and the SciMentors volunteers. This conversation ensures that SciMentors addresses the topics and material that will be most beneficial to students. Volunteers travel to Open Door schools so that students do not have an additional transportation commitment, which can be a prohibitive barrier. Our relationship with the MLC has also fostered other connections between the U of MN and community organizations. For example, students from the Open Door schools and their families recently attended Energy and U, a science show put on by CHEM that combines demonstrations and multimedia to teach the public about energy sources, use, and conservation.18 Volunteers

SciMentors began as a small project of the CHEM chapter of WISE. This allowed the program to be tested with a small group of graduate students who had already self-identified as interested in promoting science literacy. Once the program structure was developed and tested, recruitment of volunteers expanded to additional students and postdoctoral associates in CHEM, and then to science departments university wide. Both male and female volunteers are recruited and serve. The B

DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b01002 J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX

Journal of Chemical Education

Article

to provide the resources to facilitate hands-on learning to encourage retention of information. Class begins with a 5−10 min conversation introducing the day’s topic with a focus on relating the topic to students’ lives. Adult learners are generally “problem-centered learners” in that they use real-world examples and problems to aid in their understanding of topics.20 By linking chemistry and science to everyday life and products, science is demystified and regarded as approachable and exciting instead of difficult and uninteresting.21 For example, prior to the DNA extraction experiment where the DNA is extracted from strawberries, students are asked what they know about DNA. Often students will bring up crime shows that use DNA sequencing to identify culprits, and this allows the teachers to discuss DNA in a way that is relevant to the students. After the introductory lecture, students receive a worksheet which has, at most, two paragraphs of introduction to the topic that is either a repeat or supplement to the lecture. Students are then broken up into groups of 3−5 and assigned a volunteer to help them work through the experiment and associated questions. The role of the volunteer is to demonstrate experimental techniques, answer questions, and promote discussion. At the end of the experiment the class comes back together for a short discussion and to address lingering questions. Example lessons are available in the Supporting Information, and the full library of our lessons is available on our Web site (vide infra).22

original core WISE members serve as leaders and models for the newer volunteers. Between 2 and 4 volunteers attend each class to maintain the ideal student to teacher ratio of 4:1. Typically, about 20 volunteers are required per semester for two schools, with some volunteers attending multiple classes. Volunteers can vary their commitment, attending classes one or more days per semester. They can also volunteer to plan the curriculum in addition or as an alternative to attending classes. The flexible time commitment and option to vary the level of involvement generates a large volunteer base more than sufficient to staff all the classes. Class Design

SciMentors works closely with the director of each school to ensure that the class design meets the schools’ needs. At site A, science classes are offered once per week. To comply with this schedule, SciMentors volunteers teach a 60−75 min class approximately every other week. At site B, science and math are taught in a three-week block, alternating with a three-week block of English and social studies. In addition, site B requested a longer class; thus, SciMentors volunteers teach a 120 min class twice a month, usually attending two consecutive weeks. The high frequency of classes was important to our program goal of developing relationships and trust between students and teachers. Class and volunteer schedules are planned three times a year to allow for flexibility while still ensuring that each class has enough volunteers and that the class leaders have sufficient time to plan their lesson and gather supplies. The class structure is modeled after traditional laboratory teaching with a special focus on the experimental and discussion components that are not part of the daily Open Door learning experience. As the goal of the program is to provide interactive, hands-on experiential learning, the lecture and reading portions of the class are kept to a minimum (see Figure 1). Hands-on learning has been proven to lead to retention of material and increased understanding of material but is often omitted from classrooms (like those at Open Door Learning Center) due to lack of resources.19 SciMentors aims

■

LESSON DESIGN

Objectives

Teaching science provides the opportunity to not only teach specific concepts and theories that explain the world around us, but to also practice critical thinking skills. The audience of this program also necessitates focus on GED test taking skills. To meet these three goals, lessons integrate basic math and communication skills with scientific skills including asking a question, defining a problem, making a logical argument, observing and describing a process, and analytical skills. The scientific method is taught explicitly multiple times throughout the year and reviewed within many other lessons as it is both a good demonstration of critical thinking skills and a major component of the GED science test.23 Classroom management is also considered to ensure the environment fosters discussion among students and provides a supportive space for students to ask questions, brainstorm, and learn through trial and error. A secondary goal of the program is to help highly technical graduate level scientists think about how to best present science to general audiences. It can be difficult for graduate students to communicate basic scientific information in a way that the general public can understand, so we also focus on helping our volunteers develop effective communication skills to make this program successful for both the volunteers and students. Whether going into academia, industry, or an alternative career, communication skills are imperative. Community driven outreach programs such as SciMentors have been shown to increase those skills and make graduate students more confident in discussing science to general audiences.24 Experiments

Experiments are designed to align with the Open Door science GED curriculum25 and to utilize low cost and easily accessible materials. The Open Door classrooms are basic rooms without sinks, enhanced ventilation, or other science-oriented design.

Figure 1. Flowchart showing the progression of each class and how student involvement and discussion is facilitated to maximize learning. C

DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b01002 J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX

Journal of Chemical Education

Article

Table 1. Example of Concept-, Skill-, and Demonstration-Based Experiments Category Concept

Skill

Demo

Title Choosing an Effective Deicer

Water on a Penny

Heat and Light

Experiment

Primary Focus

Experimentally determine the heat of solvation for four salts, then choose the most effective deicer

Heat of reaction

Secondary Foci Experimental design General math Using and manipulating scientific equations Framing and asking questions

Determine how many drops of water can fit on a penny, then design an experiment that tests how different variables might change that value

Experimental design

Three demonstrations that show conversion of energy: Thermite, Luminol, Strontium hydroxide + ammonium nitrate

The role of multiple trials in scientific experimentation Conservation of Diversity of chemical reactions energy Observation skills

Thermite, strontium hydroxide and ammonium nitrate, and Luminol. To maintain an interactive environment, the class is broken up into discussion groups after each demonstration to discuss pertinent topics (in this example, types of energy and energy conservation) and observations and questions resulting from the demonstration.

Due to the classroom limitations and the desire to allow students to repeat experiments at home, most experiments are designed with materials that have little to no safety concerns. Any experiments that pose a larger safety risk are accompanied by a thorough safety discussion. Prior to execution, each lesson plan is reviewed by at least two of the program leaders, and new volunteers must attend at least two classes as assistants before becoming leaders or designing a lesson. This ensures that the level of the lesson is appropriate for the target audience. Activities fall into one of three categories: (1) concept-based, (2) skill-based, and (3) interactive demonstrations (see Table 1 for examples and Table S1 for complete list of experiments). Concept-based activities demonstrate a concept learned in the class through experimentation, observation, and analyzing results. An example of a concept-based lab is the Heat of Reaction experiment, in which students test the heat of solvation of different salts to find the best for use as a deicer on Minnesota roads. Some activities have a “cookbook” type procedure to walk students through an experiment that verifies a concept taught at the beginning of class. Others use a guided inquiry approach wherein the students “discover” a concept through an experiment in which they must design the procedure26 (see “Example Lesson #1” in the Supporting Information). The guided inquiry experiments are modeled after the guided inquiry lab courses being taught at the U of MN and other schools.27 Skill-based laboratories use technically simple experiments to emphasize one or more of the following skills: algebra, designing an experiment using the scientific method, interpreting and generating graphs, interpreting data and identifying logical fallacies, and summarizing results or observations (see “Example Lesson #2” in the Supporting Information). An example of practicing the scientific method is the Water on a Penny lab, wherein students design their own experiment to determine how different variables affect the number of drops of water that can fit on a penny. This experiment does not include explicit discussion of pertinent science concepts, such as water tension, to keep the focus on the skill of designing an experiment. Of course, many of the concept-based activities also cover these fundamental skills, and there is overlap between these two categories. Some concepts do not have experiments that fit into the safety parameters of our program, or would be greatly enhanced by demonstrations that can be performed only by trained professionals. In these cases, we use an interactive demonstration lesson as the laboratory activity (see “Example Lesson #3” in the Supporting Information). An example is the three reaction demonstration used to introduce the energy unit:

Challenges

One significant challenge is designing experiments flexible enough to accommodate the wide range of abilities in the science classes. English language skills, math skills, and educational background vary greatly among the students. In addition, admission is rolling such that on any given day, while some students may have been attending class for a full year and understand the class procedures, others may be entering a classroom for the first time in 20 years. This challenge was addressed by designing some experiments with multiple parts, so that a less experienced student can still benefit from completing only one part, and more advanced students can complete the entire lesson. During the class, discussion and inquiry are stressed over completing the entire experiment or the associated worksheet. This emphasis is designed to encourage scientific exploration as well as to foster a supportive learning environment. A related challenge is nurturing discussion among students. Adult learners are often reluctant to speak in class for a variety of reasons. They may be embarrassed by their status as older learners, or have bad memories of schooling where they were chastised for not knowing the correct answer. We try to combat this by emphasizing that science is about exploration and asking questions, and prioritizing scientific process over a correct answer. In addition, we have found it is very important to move the desks or tables into small groups, rather than leave them in a linear arrangement. This change has been one of the biggest factors in encouraging students to work together, ask questions, and take risks. While we originally started with volunteers walking around the room answering questions when needed, we found that by having a volunteer sit with each group to work through the experiment with the students, we are able to more effectively engage the students and facilitate discussion and brainstorming between students. A small group environment with a dedicated volunteer makes participation less intimidating, especially for students who have been out of school for many years or who are still mastering English.

■

OUTCOMES The program is now entering its fourth year, and we can report on initial outcomes. Since starting in fall of 2014, we have D

DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b01002 J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX

Journal of Chemical Education

Article

developed two years of lesson plans covering topics in chemistry, physics, earth science, biology, ecology, and the scientific method. The program has 30+ active volunteers at any one time that help plan, lead, and conduct lessons. We have also established a sustainable leadership board that will ensure the program continues even when its founders leave the U of MN. Finally, the program has developed strong relationships with the students, and we have received extremely positive feedback from students and volunteers (see Evaluation section below). Evaluation

We have evaluated the effect of program participation on students and volunteers through surveys, and on the partner community organization through personal communication. Two surveys have been administered to the students in the program, with overwhelmingly positive reviews. (See Supporting Information for full survey and results for this and future surveys described.) In the first survey, performed after one year of program operation, half said the only thing they would change about the program is that they wanted more science classes per week (Table S6). All students responded positively to the question inquiring if the student would recommend the science classes to a friend (Table S4). Yes, because there are good teachers and the science projects you do are very helpful The teachers were very nice and fine with teaching and doing the labs with us Yes, if like me they like to do hands-on experiments and learn new things The second student survey was performed after 2.5 years of program operation. About half of the students present for the first survey also took the second survey; however, the surveys do not record the student identity, so this fact was not considered in analysis of the repsonses. Students were asked to rank their comfort level with science before and after attending experiments with SciMentors, how much SciMentors has helped their knowledge in science, and how much SciMentors has increased their interest in science on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is low comfort or increase, and 10 is high comfort or increase (Figure 2). All the students surveyed remained at the same comfort level (≈40% of surveyed students) or experienced an increase in comfort level with science (≈60% of surveyed students) with increases as high as 7 points on the 10-point scale. The average rankings for increase in knowledge of and interest in science were 9.1 and 9.6, respectively, demonstrating that SciMentors has not only increased science understanding but also increased interest and excitement in science (Figures 1B and Figures S1 and S2). When asked what students like most about SciMentors, the majority of students replied that they enjoy doing hands-on experiments (∼30%) or a specific experiment (∼25%). Others stated that they like connecting theory to practice, the practicality of the experiments, or how the SciMentors volunteers explain concepts (Table S8). Evaluation of SciMentors based solely on student academic success is difficult for a number of reasons. First, there are numerous factors we cannot control. The student body is highly mobile, and students often change GED programs. In addition, the beginning educational level and schedule of the individual student vary considerably, meaning that studying for and passing the GED can take anywhere from several months to seven or more years. As the program has only existed for

Figure 2. Results from a survey given to SciMentors students after 2.5 years of program operation. (A) Change in level of comfort with scientific topics as reported by SciMentors students as a result of attending SciMentors classes. (B) Extent to which attending SciMentors classes has increased students’ science knowledge and interest in science, as self-reported by the student.

three years, comprehensive analysis of its direct effect on test scores is not available. Second, we feel that excessive testing or surveying would distract from the teaching mission of the program, and may cause students to feel exploited or unsafe. The Open Door schools do not utilize testing except to place students when they first enter the school, and it is our responsibility as a supporting volunteer organization to follow that policy. In the future we hope to work with Open Door and the Department of STEM Education at the U of M to craft effective and sensitive evaluations of the program. In the meantime, while it is difficult to correlate academic success to the program, the existing student surveys show a strong relationship between program attendance and increase in science knowledge, interest, and comfort level. The staff at both schools, as representatives of the community partners, have reported receiving positive feedback from their students, and have written letters in support of the program to ensure continued funding. Staff have also reported that the science classes are consistently some of the highest attended classes of the week.6 Furthermore, as the program is discussed among staff, other schools have approached us to expand the program. Continued interest from both the students and staff suggests a positive impact. To assess the impact of SciMentors on the volunteers, we surveyed current and past volunteers with questions addressing the following topics: comfort and effectiveness in discussing science, interest in science education as part of ones paid or volunteer work, knowledge about the GED process, and knowledge about local immigrant communities. Select E

DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b01002 J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX

Journal of Chemical Education

Article

Figure 3. Results from a survey given to SciMentors volunteers, in which they were asked to rate on a scale of 1 to 10 their comfort level, perceived effectiveness, likelihood of future action, or familiarity regarding the six topics above. Volunteers were asked to consider how they felt both before having volunteered (prevolunteer) and after having volunteered (postvolunteer) with SciMentors.

help adult learners and science curriculum development (see Supporting Information for complete responses). Volunteers were also asked to state which skills they felt they had gained as a result of their volunteer work. Over half of respondents (55%, Figure 4) stated that they had gained communication skills. Thus, although the communication skills topics showed the lowest positive change (as seen in Figure 3), this clearly is a skill that volunteers have improved upon, and find valuable. It is also important to note that, in general, students who choose science outreach have a higher than average level of comfort with, and desire to, discuss science. Thus, the relatively small increase is understandable, and any change should be viewed as significant. Some respondents elaborated with specific communication skill examples, such as “the ability to distill complex concepts down to more manageable statements”, “flexibility in how I explain things”, and “connecting real life examples to concepts”. Volunteers listed a wide variety of skills and knowledge gained, as seen in Figure 4. After communication, the second

responses are reported in Figures 3 and 4, and the full survey and responses are available in the Supporting Information.

Figure 4. Skill sets that volunteers report having gained or improved upon based on their volunteer experience with SciMentors.

All volunteers reported no change or a positive change with regard to each question, and volunteers overall reported a positive change for each question. (For this survey, a positive change is defined as an increase in numerical response to a particular question as a result of having volunteered.) The greatest change was reported in response to the question asking about the likelihood of the volunteer seeking out science literacy volunteer opportunities in the future, indicating that this program has the potential to impact graduate students and postdoctoral fellows, and the communities in which they reside, for years to come. The topic which showed the second greatest increase was knowledge about GED programs, indicating that this program has been successful in educating volunteers about the challenges faced by communities not present on a university campus or in academic circles. Indeed, this conclusion is supported by short answer responses to the question, “If we held a training, what topics would you be interested in learning about?” Over half the volunteers expressed interest in a crosscultural topic, such as Somali culture and language and the immigration process in the United States. Most other responses to this question were teaching related, including how to best

Figure 5. Benefits of SciMentors realized by CHEM volunteers and GED-seeking students.

most common reported skill set was curriculum planning (28% of respondents). Most U of MN chemistry graduate students perform their teaching assistant duties as leaders of large laboratory classes, for which the curriculum is strictly set and there is no opportunity for the graduate students to experience planning a class. Thus, SciMentors introduces volunteers to important aspects of planning and teaching a class, such as the following specific skills noted by volunteers: integrating a topic into the greater curriculum, managing time, tailoring the content to the appropriate audience, encouraging discussion, F

DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b01002 J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX

Journal of Chemical Education

Article

Figure 6. Homepage of the SciMentors Web site where curriculum, volunteer opportunities, program information, and links to outreach resources are available to the University community as well as to the general public. Volunteer and CHEM graduate student Waqas Rasheed developed the SciMentors logo and maintains the SciMentors webpage. Reproduced with permission from ref 22. Copyright 2017 Regents of the University of Minnesota.

individual bins, to make for an easy “grab and go” approach to outreach preparation.

and producing class materials. Their responses show that they feel that this program has enhanced their teaching and communication skills in ways that they anticipate will be beneficial in the job search. Other comments included how the program has led to increased confidence, networking with other graduate students, and the ability to be involved in a community that is otherwise somewhat segregated from the University community. As a final note, the program volunteer recidivism (58% have volunteered more than three times) indicates that volunteers find the program valuable. Highlights of the realized benefits of SciMentors for students and volunteers are presented in Figure 5.

■

CONCLUSIONS We have developed a unique outreach program that addresses a significant community need that is hitherto unaddressed by most university science outreach coordinators. Working with adult learners has several major benefits. Adult learners are actively making life decisions that impact their communities and would immediately benefit from stronger scientific knowledge and critical thinking skills. Second, higher education level in parents directly correlates with the success of their children; thus, helping an adult achieve their GED is a positive impact on an entire family. Finally, adult learners are highly motivated to learn and succeed, making them ideal students. In turn, the adult students have reported high satisfaction with the SciMentors program, including an increase in science knowledge, comfort, and interest. Graduate student and postdoctoral volunteers have found the program an asset in developing both professional skills and community relationships. Taken together, we find science outreach directed toward adult learners both highly impactful and highly rewarding.

Web Presence

The program maintains a Web site designed and maintained by program volunteers, with hosting from the U of MN (see Figure 6 and ref 21). The primary purpose of the Web site is to make the lesson plans available for use by SciMentors volunteers as well as anyone else who teaches science, including parents, teachers, and other outreach programs. We hope that other institutions can make use of these resources to start similar programs. Other resources on the Web site include contact information and links to outreach and science education related Web sites, and general information about the program including volunteers and lesson plans.21

■

■

ASSOCIATED CONTENT

S Supporting Information *

OUTLOOK

The Supporting Information is available on the ACS Publications website at DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b01002. Descriptions of each experiment, a schedule showing the correlation between experiments and GED topics, worksheet templates, examples of each type of experiment worksheet (concept-based, skill-based, and demonstrations), and full student and volunteer surveys and results (PDF)

Future Directions

Now that SciMentors is a well-established program, we are focusing on expanding the curriculum and reach. One goal in progress is designing a second set of experiments for each topic. First, this avoids repetition for students who attend class for more than a year. Second, additional examples or experiments that teach the same topic reinforce the idea that science is an integral part of our world. In addition to expanding the curriculum, we are in the process of expanding to additional learning centers. We have a wide volunteer base and many early career graduate students who are interested in taking a leadership role in the program through organizing outreach at new learning centers. By expanding to more learning centers, we can increase the number of students benefiting from hands-on experiments in the community. As necessary, the volunteer base can be expanded by recruiting from other science departments at the U of MN. This diversity of volunteers will expand the scientific knowledge base of the program and aide in curriculum development. Finally, we are developing an organizational system in which the materials for each experiment are stored in

■

AUTHOR INFORMATION

Corresponding Authors

*E-mail: [email protected]. *E-mail: [email protected]. ORCID

Nicole L. Gagnon: 0000-0002-3091-1548 Anna J. Komor: 0000-0003-4806-4233 Present Address ‡

Department of Biomolecular Chemistry, Leibniz Institute for Natural Product Research and Infection Biology, Beutenbergstraße 11a, 07745 Jena, Germany. G

DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b01002 J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX

Journal of Chemical Education

Article

Author Contributions

(14) Hannan, M. C. The Scientific Method as Applied to Different Fields of Education. J. Chem. Educ. 1943, 20 (6), 308. (15) McKone, H. T.; Banville, B. A. Developing the Critical Thinking Skills of Adult Learners Through Consumer and Environmental Applications of Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 1988, 65 (3), 218. (16) Aymeloglu, K.; Rubinchik, V. Open Door Learning Center: Minneapolis, MN, personal communication, Jun 2016. (17) Wilson, Z. S.; McGuire, S. Y.; Limbach, P. A.; Doyle, M. P.; Marzilli, L. G.; Warner, I. M. Diversifying Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM): An Inquiry into Successful Approaches in Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2014, 91 (11), 1860−1866. (18) The Energy and U Show. http://www1.chem.umn.edu/energyu/ (accessed May 2017). (19) Thomas, C. L. Assessing High School Student Learning on Science Outreach Lab Activities. J. Chem. Educ. 2012, 89 (10), 1259− 1263. (20) McKone, H. T.; Banville, B. A. Developing the Critical Thinking Skills of Adult Learners through consumer and Environmental Applications of Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 1988, 65 (3), 218. (21) Billington, S.; Smith, R. B.; Karousos, N. G.; Cowham, E.; Davis, J. Covert Approaches to Countering Adult Chemophobia. J. Chem. Educ. 2008, 85 (3), 379−380. (22) SciMentors: Promoting Science Literacy in the Twin Cities. http:// scimentors.chem.umn.edu/ (accessed May 2017). (23) Neuffer, S. The Relationship Between Scientific Method and Critical Thinking. http://oureverydaylife.com/relationship-betweenscientific-method-critical-thinking-19049.html (accessed May 2017). (24) Bishop, L. M.; Tillman, A. S.; Geiger, F. M.; Haynes, C. L.; Klaper, R. D.; Murphy, C. J.; Orr, G.; Pedersen, J. A.; DeStefano, L.; Hamers, R. J. Enhancing Graduate Student Communication to General Audiences through Blogging about Nanotechnology and Sustainability. J. Chem. Educ. 2014, 91 (10), 1600−1605. (25) Minnesota Literacy Council. GED: Science. http://mnliteracy. org/learning-centers/classes/ged-science (accessed May 2017). (26) Allen, J. B.; Barker, L. N.; Ramsden, J. H. Guided Inquiry Laboratory. J. Chem. Educ. 1986, 63 (6), 533−534. (27) Guided Inquiry Transforms Chemistry Laboratories. http://www1. chem.umn.edu/news/news.lasso?serial=302 (accessed May 2017).

†

N.L.G. and A.J.K. contributed equally to the work and are listed in alphabetical order. Notes

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

■

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to acknowledge the Office of Equity and Diversity Women’s Center and Department of Chemistry at the University of Minnesota for funding and our many volunteers for all of their hard work. We would especially like to thank the following volunteers for taking a leadership role in the SciMentors program: Rahul Banerjee, Courtney E. Elwell, Solaire A. Finkenstaedt-Quinn, Scott Kleespies, Anna M. Luke, Stephanie L. Mitchell, Sadie C. Otte, Bianca L. Ramirez, Waqas Rasheed, Brent Rivard, Emily Ruff, Xin Yi See, and Craig Van Bruggen. We would also like to thank Letitia Yao for her support and encouragement. Thank you to Andrew Spaeth for helpful comments on the paper. Finally, thank you to the wonderful staff at the MLC and the Open Doors Schools, especially Kat Aymeloglu and Vadim Rubinchik.

■

REFERENCES

(1) National Center for Education Statistics. Percentage of the population 25 to 64 years old who completed high school, by age group and country: Selected years, 2001 through 2012. https://nces. ed.gov/programs/digest/d14/tables/dt14_603.10.asp (accessed May 2017). (2) GED Testing Service. Annual statistical reports. http://www. gedtestingservice.com/educators/historical-testing-data (accessed May 2017). (3) Minnesota Literacy Council. Students. https://mnliteracy.org/ students (accessed May 2017). (4) Importance of Hands-On Laboratory Science; ACS Public Policy Statement; 2014−2017. (5) Kontra, C.; Lyons, D. J.; Fischer, S. M.; Beilock, S. L. Physical Experience Enhances Science Learning. Psychological Science 2015, 26 (6), 737−749. (6) Verheyden, P.; et al. Correlating Science Center Use With Adult Science Literacy: An International Cross-Institutional Study. Sci. Educ. 2016, 100 (5), 849−876. (7) Falk, J. H.; Needham, M. D. Factors Contributing to Adult Knowledge of Science and Technology. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2013, 50 (4), 431−452. (8) Morais, C. Storytelling with Chemistry and Related Hands-On Activities: Informal Learning Experiences To Prevent “Chemophobia” and Promote Young Children’s Scientific Literacy. J. Chem. Educ. 2015, 92 (1), 58−65. (9) Murnane, R. J.; Willett, J. B.; Boudett, K. P. Do High School Dropouts Benefit From Obtaining a GED? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 2016, 17 (2), 133−147. (10) Askarinam, L. When Low-Income Parents Go Back to School. http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/02/when-lowincome-parents-return-to-school/470094/ (accessed May 2017). (11) Crowley, K.; Callanan, M. A.; Jipson, J. L.; Galco, J.; Topping, K.; Shrager, J. Shared Scientific Thinking in Everyday Parent-Child Activity. Sci. Educ. 2001, 85 (6), 712−732. (12) Dubow, E. F.; Boxer, P.; Huesmann, L. R. Long-term Effects of Parents’ Education on Children’s Educational and Occupational Success: Mediation by Family Interactions, Child Aggression, and Teenage Aspirations. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly (Wayne State University. Press) 2009, 55 (3), 224−249. (13) Schuller, T.; Preston, J.; Hammond, C.; Brassett-Grundy, A.; Bynner, J. The Benefits of Learning: The Impact of Education on Health, Family Life and Social Capital; Routledge: London, 2004; pp 80−99. H

DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b01002 J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX